This week we received a few comments from an atheist concerning a number of articles. I have selected these two because they are so typical of many similar comments I’ve heard from atheists over the years.
From: An aetheist (sue me)
Mimicry is not pure chance. If a creature looks slightly more like a leaf, there is a slightly higher chance of survival. It will pass this trait on, and so forth with its offspring.
Dear An aetheist (sue me), thank you for sending in your comments and giving me the chance to respond to you and other atheists.
First of all, this article dealt with camouflage and not mimicry. Had you read the first two paragraphs of the article you would have known this.
Secondly, your simple defense of mimicry/camouflage does not explain any of the genetic problems that are mentioned in the article. Again I will ask the question of where does the new genetic information come from that that allows the plant or animal to mimic another organism or camouflage themselves to look like another organism.
Case in point, the dead-leaf preying mantis and it’s broadened exoskeleton. Evolutionists want you to believe that the original mantis did not possess this trait. Over time the mantis ever so slowly kept mutating over and over until it finally evolved this unique camouflage characteristic. Only I have yet to see a report or study that identifies and documents the various stages of mutation and from where the genetic information came from.
You may be surprised to know that I fully believe of survival of the fittest. However survival of the fittest does not explain molecules-to-man macroevolution. Generally when natural selection selects for a trait that allows an organism to survive where other members of the same species that do not possess the same trait are less likely to survive, it results in a loss of information or the amount of heterozygosity (genetic variation). This is the exact opposite of what evolution requires. Evolution is based on an ever increasing amount of new genetic information, yet natural selection and speciation both tend toward a loss of information or variability of information.
Evolutionists cannot prove that mimicry or camouflage is an evolved trait, nor can a creationist prove that it was originally designed to blend in or mimic something else. We both have the same facts of a preying mantis with a wide exoskeleton that is shaped and colored like the dead leaves that litter the ground in their area. Evolutionists interpret this evidence through their evolutionary presuppositions of billions of years of godless random chance processes. Creationists interpret the same evidence through their biblical presuppositions of an all knowing Intelligent Creator God of the Bible.
From: An aetheist (sue me)
And it isn’t creation, so don’t shove that one down my throat.
Dear An aetheist (sue me), I would like to address your statement about us not shoving our views down your throat. When was the last time you looked in a mirror? By this I mean that it is people like you that are doing everything they can to shove atheistic evolution down everyone’s throats while at the same time you tell us not to do the same to you.
It’s not only taught in the public schools but has been legally protected by the courts. It’s also taught in most of the major universities. College students that question evolution are openly ridiculed by professors, some are purposely failed and yet others are denied their rightfully earned graduate degrees. There’s even a group of secular scientists that have been working with Hollywood writers to get more godless evolution shoved down our throats on television and motion pictures. It’s used to market numerous products and programs.
Did you know that atheism is defined as a religion? It is the belief that there is no God. Isn’t it amazing that your religion is being forcibly shoved down our throats while our religion is banned from many sectors? In a nation that was founded upon Christianity, even Islam has more rights than Christianity does.
Besides, no one has forced you to visit our website. You came by your own volition. On the contrary, our children don’t have that same option when they enter the halls of our public school propaganda system.
And you have the audacity to tell us not to shove our views down YOUR throat? Are you familiar with the term hypocrite? You remind me of Matthew 7:5 – You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.
Lastly, I would like to ask you a question: Are you just espousing the typical atheist rhetoric that has been floating around for several decades or have you actually taken the time to study what biblical creation really teaches along with many of the science that has been conducted by creation scientists?
Over the years, I have asked this question to folks like yourself and over 95% of them have had to honestly admit that they have never studied anything about creationism and are just repeating what they hear everyone else saying. I had one guy pause for a minute when I asked him this question. I’ll never forget his response when he told that he realized that he jumped on the bandwagon without ever having learned to play an instrument.
Whey they admit that they are repeating typical rhetoric; I ask them how can they truly criticize something that they know nothing about. Are they just accepting what they have heard from others? Would you accept everything these other people say as being completely reliable and truthful? Would you be willing to risk your finances on the words of these people? How much can you really trust them?
To justify my asking this question to people such as you, I have spent a great deal of time over the past 40 years reading and studying evolution. I have a Bachelor of Science degree in Wildlife Biology from a major state university. Even though my Master of Science degree in biology was done at the Institute for Creation Research, over 75% of our studies were on evolution. I have read everything that Darwin wrote, including his letters to friends and family. I’ve also read a great deal from other evolutionists including Thomas Huxley, Ernst Haeckel, Ernst Mayr, Stephen Jay Gould, Niles Eldridge, George Gaylord Simpson, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking, John Ostrum, David Berlinksi, Lynn Margulis, Alan Templeton, Bob Horner, Georges Cuvier, William Schopf, and the list goes on and on.
Sue me – have you ever read any of the works of Steve Austin, Andrew Snelling, D. Russell Humphreys, Larry Vardiman, Kurt Wise, Robert Carter, Jonathan Sarfati, Danny Faulkner, Tasman Walker, John Hartnett, Michael Oard, John Baumgardner, Andrew Kulikovsky, Werner Gitt, David DeWitt, Marcus Ross, Frank Sherwin, Don DeYoung, Kevin Anderson, Gene Chaffin, Ron Samec, John Reed, Carl Froede Jr, John Woodmorappe, Guy Berthault, Jerry Bergman, Jason Lyle, Mark Armitage, Dan Criswell, Todd Wood, Walter Remine, Alexander V. Lalomov, George Howe to name a few?
May I strongly suggest that if you wish to continue your criticism of biblical creationism that you spend some time studying the subject first. And if you take the advice seriously, I would recommend any of the following materials to start with: